
Glass. 
Book 






a 



wMWWm 



THE POPE AND ITALY 



by 



VERY REV. NAZARENO CASACCA, 
O.S.A., D.D. 



Trauelated from the Original Italian 

by 
Rev. J. A. HICKEY, O.S.A., D.D. 

With a Preface by 

Most Rev. D. J. DOUGHERTY, D.D. 

Archbishop of Philadelphia 



Non Nova sed Noviter 



PHILADELPHIA 
JOHN JOSEPH McVEY 

1920 



THE POPE AND ITALY 



by 



VERY REV. NAZARENO CASACCA, 
O.S.A., D.D. 



Translated from the Original Italian 
by 
^■' Rev. J. A. HICKEY, O.S.A., D.D. 

With a Preface by 

Most Rev. D. J. DOUGHERTY, D.D. 

Archbishop of Philadelphia 



Non Nova sed Noviter 



PHILADELPHIA 
JOHN JOSEPH McVEY 

1920 









^ 



FE. N. J. VASEY, 

Provinoialis, 0. S. A. 



Nilytt ®b0tat: 

JOSEPH M. COERIGAN, S. T. D., 

Censor Librorum. 
August 27th, 1919. 



*D. J. DOUGHERTY, 

ArcMepiscopMS PMladelpMensis. 
September 15th, 1919. 



MAK 20 1920 

Copyright, 1920, by John Joseph McVey. 



PEEFACE. 

UNTIL settled, the Eoman question will remain a 
sore spot for Italy and the world. Not before the 
solution of this problem can the Italian Nation put 
forth its full strength. 

For a thousand years, the Pope had been in legiti- 
mate possession of his territory. Hence, King Victor 
Emmanuel's entry into Eome, through the breach at 
Porta Pia, his seizure of the Papal States, and the 
confiscation of Church properties, were a wrong. 

Nearly fifty years have gone by since that time ; but 
each succeeding Pope has protested against the inva- 
sion and spoliation. For time cannot undo injustice. 

Neither can the Papacy be ignored. It is not only 
ihe oldest and most wide-spread institution on earth; 
it is also the most powerful ; and through its three hun- 
dred million members it reaches out to every part of 
the world. Its foes may gnash their teeth at it; try 
as they may, they cannot forget it. The world, and 
especially Italy, listens when the Pope speaks. 

The Papacy can do without the States of which it 
was spoiled. It cannot live without freedom and in- 
dependence. Moreover, its liberty must be apparent 
to the world, and satisfactorily guaranteed. For the 
moment that the Pope becomes the subject of any na- 
tion, or even a suspected subject, his effectiveness is 
impaired. 

Under the conditions of modern life, mth Socialism 
rampant, it would, perhaps, be difficult for the Holy 
Father to regain the Papal States. It would be still 
more difficult for him civilly to rule them. Yet, if the 
Pope is to be free and independent, he must have 



iv Preface. 

some territory not subject to another ruler. How ex- 
tensive that territory should be is a detail that could, 
be arranged amicably between the Pope and the pres- 
ent Italian Government. 

But one thing is undeniable: that it should never 
be possible for any nation to have the Papacy at its 
mercy, and to pretend to use it as a pawn on the politi- 
cal chess-board. The nations of the world owe it ta 
themselves that they combine to endorse a satisfac- 
tory agreement between the Papacy and the Italian 
Grovemment; and to make this covenant binding for- 
ever. 

Let no one say that the present Italian Law of 
Guarantees is sufficient. It is a one-sided document,, 
drawn up by the Italian Government without consult- 
ing the Holy See, and has never been accepted by the- 
latter. Its chief flaw is its instability. An Italian 
Parliament made it; an Italian Parliament may un- 
make it at will. 

Sound Statesmanship dictates that the Eoman 
question be solved at once by the initiative of the^ 
Italian Government, that the agreement be mutually 
satisfactory to the Papacy and Italy, and that it be- 
internationalized. 

The reader of Dr. Casacca's work will find these 
points brilliantly developed. Having a deep love for 
his native land and for the Holy See, he points out the^ 
way to a happy solution of the Roman question. His 
book is written with great moderation and power of 
reasoning, and will undoubtedly be read with mucb 
interest and profit. 

*D. J. Dougherty, 
Archbishop of PJiiladelphia.. 



FOREWOED. 

1 WOULD ask the reader, no matter what his personal 
opinions may be, to read without bias this brief and 
modest work. It treats of a theme of the utmost im- 
portance. I would not have published it if I had not 
been convinced that every word in it is true and in- 
spired by a desire for the welfare of Italy. I would 
ask him, moreover, in his reading to hearken to the 
prudent counsel of Augustine, who admonishes us not 
to find fault with a work until we have read it in its 
entirety. "Quisquis legis, nihil repreJiendas, nisi cum 
totum legeris." (De Mendacio Cap. I.) 

Eecently a large number of articles on the Roman 
Question made their appearance in the press. The 
authors of these articles, however, were not appar- 
ently animated with a desire to give to their readers 
a clear and thorough explanation of it. For one thing, 
they were not impartial, nor did they attempt to ana- 
lyze the issue into its constituent elements; conse- 
quently, their readers derived but little profit from 
their work. With the hope of clarifying these ele- 
ments, I have ventured to publish this brief study. 

Now that Italy, through the favor of heaven and at 
a cost of heavy sacrifices, has had the good fortune to 
extend her boundaries to a geographical configuration 
more in keeping with her rights and needs ; now that 
war is over and the forces of our country are uniting 
and preparing to work together for an increase in the 
life of the nation, and to give attention to the many 
internal problems that await solution, it is highly im- 



vi Foreword. 

portant that we turn our hand likewise to the consid- 
eration of this grave problem, from the solution of 
which so many advantages would accrue to the national 
life of Italy, both at home and abroad. 

N. C. 



CONTENTS. 

PAGX 

Preface iii 

Foreword v 

CHAPTER I. 

Evil Effects of the Dissension 1 

The present relations between tlie Holy See and the 
Italian State are a source of grief to the friends of Italy 
and a cause of injury to the Holy See, to the people, and 
to the intellectual, moral and economic life of the nation. 
A settlement of the dissension, far from injuring anyone, 
would be of advantage to all concerned. 

CHAPTER II. 
Faulty Methods of Discussion 2 

Faults committed in the discussion of the question; (1) 
By the friends of the Pope through their emphasis of 
supematuralism ; (2) By the adversaries of the Pope 
through their constant insistence, to the exclusion of every- 
thing else, on the existing conditions which are in discussion 
and which have arisen through an act of injustice; (3) 
By the indifferent, intemperate and incompetent. 

CHAPTER III. 
Who Is the Pope? 5 

(1) The answer given by theologians which is effective 
for the members of the Church (a Free Church in a Free 
State) ; (2) The answer to be found in the facts of history, 
which should be effective for all men; the existence and 
activity of the Pope in the centuries. 

CHAPTER IV. 

Benedict XV 11 

Prior to, and after, his elevation to the Papacy; his 
conduct during the World War; his great power. 

vii 



vjii Contents. 

CHAPTER V. PAGE 

Aims of the Papacy 15 

The honor of Grod; the eternal and temporal happiness 
of man; the promotion of Christian morality; obedience to 
constituted authority; the attitude of the Popes to the 
arts, sciences and philanthropy. 

CHAPTER VI. 

Special Independence of the Pope 17 

The Pope is identified with Christianity; his office su- 
preme and ultranational in character; his authority over 
the inner and outer world; absolute liberty and independ- 
ence from all earthly power essential to the papal mission. 

CHAPTER VII. 

Spiritual, Temporal and Territorial Dominion 19 

Nature of dominion and its three divisions ; first two pos- 
sessed by the Pope throughout the entire world; the third, 
which follows as a corollary from the other two, necessary 
in his See. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

The Roman Question 20 

The Civil Power of the Pope legitimate in its origin and 
in its subsequent development; the Pope's titles to Civil 
Dominion which are subject, or impervious to, prescrip- 
tion; the Roman Question arose from the manner in which 
Italy was unified ; the attempts of the State to make repara- 
tion in its Law of Guarantees. 

CHAPTER IX. 

The Law op Guarantees 23 

One-sided, enacted without the concurrence of the Pope; 
despite everything a solemn, though unintentional, 
proof of his ultranational sovereignty; inadequate as 
to the purpose and end for which it was devised; insuffi- 
cient as shown by the facts ; apparently generous, in reality 
subversive of the rights of the Papacy. 



Contents. ix 

CHAPTER X. 

PAQB 

The Claims of the Pope 35 

The claims of the Pope have never been sought by the 
State; exaggerated and misinterpreted by his adversaries; 
neither opposed to national unity nor against the territorial 
integrity of Italy; means required for the free and inde- 
pendent exercise of the Papal mission; three objections 
answered. 

CHAPTER XI. 

Papal Sovereignty^ the Unity and Integrity of Italy 45 

Papal Sovereignty and the unity and integrity of Italy 
are not only reconcilable but mutually helpful; the Pope 
demands restoration from Italy alone; Papal neutrality 
during the War of the Nations (see note). 

CHAPTER XII. 
The Conduct of Italy 53 

Her culpable attitude of indifference in the face of an 
urgent and grave duty towards the nation. 

CHAPTER XIII. 

Fundamental Points for the Negotiation and Settlement . . 54 
Settlement without territory; settlement with territory 
simpUciter and secundum quid; an international law of 
guarantees; fundamental concepts, transactia, the sov* 
ereignty of the Pope and means for its practical exercise; 
personal independence of the Pope, of his acts, of his See, 
and of an adequate territory; Rome (see note) ; reasonable 
conclusions ; proper dispositions of mind on the part of the 
State, of citizens, and especially of Catholics, in the discus- 
sion of the question. 



THE POPE AND ITALY. 



CHAPTER I. 

EVIL EFFECTS OF THE DISSENSION. 

FOR the past half century the reciprocal relations be- 
tween the Holy See and the Italian Government, 
while they may have failed to disturb or impress the 
unthinking, have been a source of grave concern and 
sorrow to the sincere and intelligent who have at heart 
the welfare of Italy. Who in fact has profited or 
profits now by this long-standing state of dissen- 
sion? Not the Holy See, which has often expressly 
and solemnly declared that it finds in the existing 
situation serious handicaps to the exercise of its 
Christian mission. Not the Italian State, which by 
reason of this dissension finds itself deprived of cor- 
dial sympathy for its government on the part of the 
friends of the Holy See in Italy and elsewhere who 
have felt offended by its attitude. Not the people, 
who, despite the efforts of men of good heart and 
peace-loving minds, find in the existing condition con- 
stant motives for discord, resentment and hostility 
with which the history of the past fifty years is replete. 
Nor, finally, has this anomaly brought any advantage 
to the intellectual, moral and economic life of the na- 
tion, which in all its important activities must needs 
suffer the reactionary effects of so many forces in con- 
flict. 

On the other hand, who would suffer injury through 



2 The Pope and Italy. 

a settlement of the question? It will be evident to the 
attentive reader of this little work that not only would 
its settlement injure no one, but on the contrary, all 
would share in the advantages derived therefrom. 
The patriotic duty, therefore, of bending every effort 
to the end that a new era may arise in the relations 
between the Holy See and the Italian State, is quite 
obvious. 



CHAPTER II. 

FAULTY METHODS OF DISCUSSION. 

PERHAPS one of the reasons why a complete under- 
standing and final definition of this abnormal situ- 
ation have been impossible may be found, not so much 
in the nature of the question, as in the wrong way in 
which the problem has been approached. This diffi- 
cult question, in fact, has never been considered or 
proposed in its precise and proper terms either by the 
friends of the Pope who have written in his defence, 
or by his enemies who in dealing with it have been 
animated solely by a desire to oppose him, or finally by 
the indifferent who have treated the entire matter with 
great levity. 

The friends of the Pope, approaching the subject 
only from their own point of view, have usually em- 
phasized arguments supernatural in character. Upon 
the basis of these, they have insisted that believers 
and unbelievers alike should recognize the supremacy 
of the Pontiff and admit in him all those prerogatives 
to which he in consequence lays claim. They have 



Faulty Methods of Discussion. 3 

entertained the hope that upon the basis of the trnth, 
admitted by Catholics, that the Pope is the Vicar of 
God on earth, they would succeed in convincing their 
opponents and lead them to that attitude of respectful 
docility which is the Pope's due. Now, it is obvious 
that if we would expect men to be influenced and 
swayed by reasons that are supernatural, they should 
first of all be converted to the school and life of the 
supernatural, since one cannot reasonably submit to 
doctrines which one does not admit, nor to the exac- 
tions of a society like the Catholic Church to which one 
does not belong. By this I do not mean to imply that 
one is free to accept or reject the Church, nor that it 
belongs entirely to one's free will to admit or reject 
supernatural truths. The point I wish to make is 
simply this, that from those who are outside the pale 
of the Church, de facto if not de jure, for which they 
are responsible before God, one cannot logically de- 
mand that they should admit the contention of the 
defenders of Papal rights, especially when the argu- 
ments of these latter are based exclusively on princi- 
ples which they, however wrongly, neither recognize 
nor accept. To bring men of this kind, therefore, to a 
point of view which they will recognize as reasonable, 
we must pursue a different course. 

If the method of those, who, in seeking to gain their 
point, rely exclusively upon supernatural reasons 
against those who do not believe in them, be illogical, 
much more illogical, if possible, is the method of those 
others who, inspired by hate, seek to impede and defeat 
a proper adjustment of the mutual relations between 
the Pope and the Italian Government, by constantly 
presenting for consideration not the rights and duties 



4 The Pope and Italy. 

which emerge from the nature of things, bnt the fact 
as it stands. Let us speak plainly. In dealing with 
the prerogatives of the Pope, it is neither scientific nor 
juridical to consider only the existing conditions, 
which precisely are in dispute, ignoring altogether his 
position not only as it is in law, but likewise as it is in 
point of fact. This is a veritable begging of the ques- 
tion. In this way are established not the truths of 
law or of fact, but opinions which are in the highest 
degree arbitrary. 

Who does not know that a right which emanates di- 
rectly from the nature of a thing is and must be always 
above any other right, just as, for instance, a fact is 
above mere words? Who does not know that desires, 
conventions and even contracts which are in conflict 
with the nature of the object of the said desire, con- 
vention or contract are null and void in substance and 
of no effect ? When we discuss the question of Papal 
prerogative and attempt to solve the question without 
taking into account the fact that for so many centuries 
the Pope has been the authoritative head and absolute 
ruler of a universal society which embraces many hun- 
dred millions of men; when we fail to consider that 
the large number of Catholics throughout the world 
have the right to exact from every State a treatment 
which will not hamper the mission of their supreme 
head ; when we do not consider the undeniable and in- 
evitable exigencies which flow from a state of affairs 
that is general and world-mde; when we take into 
account none of these things, but merely other factors, 
then are we no longer in the field of scientific, legal, or 
civil discussion, but rather in that of erroneous, unjust, 
and arbitrary opinion. 



Who Is the Pope? 5 

It is clear, then, that methods of this type em- 
ployed in the discussion of the question, no matter by 
which side they are used, are certainly not calculated 
to produce that understanding out of which should 
come a proper settlement. We should likewise frown 
upon all intemperate methods which, either from an 
excess of zeal or from a spirit of sectarianism aiming 
at contempt or some other ignoble end, serve only to 
confuse and to prejudice. 

Nor is the fact less deplorable that many, like 
newspaper writers at so much a column, often attempt 
a discussion of this difficult question, without even 
having studied the matter seriously, without under- 
standing its real importance, basing their judgment 
entirely on sentiment, and repeating the vain phrases 
of others. 



CHAPTEK III. 

WHO IS THE POPE? 

TO establish the rights and duties of a person, we 
should first consider fully his prerogatives, not only 
those that are extrinsic, but, as far as possible, those 
that are intrinsic as well. Hence the first question to 
be answered in our present case is this: "Who is the 
Pope? To this an answer may be given theologically 
for those who believe and historically for all in 
general. 

According to the teaching of theologians, the Pope 
is the Vicar of God on earth. This they show in the 
following fashion: In the fulness of time the Son of 



6 The Pope and Italy. 

God descended upon the earth, miraculously taking 
upon Himself human nature that He might work out 
the salvation of humanity, which was suffering under 
the curse of original sin and its manifold evil conse- 
quences. For this purpose, when He had arrived at 
the years of maturity and had schooled a few persons 
in a new religion which was to perfect and supplant 
that of the Jews, He offered Himself in holocaust to 
the Eternal Father. But before returning to the 
Father He designated Peter to rule over all those who 
might embrace the new religion, and, conferring upon 
him every power necessary for the government of His 
subjects. He left him as His locum tenens, or Vicar. 
Thus Peter was the first Pontiff, or first of the many 
Popes, who afterwards lived through the centuries 
and who continue with the life of the Christian 
Church. 

Since the object of the new religion was the procur- 
ing for its followers, not an abundance of perishable 
earthly goods that serve only for the brief time men 
spend in this world, but the means of obtaining the 
glorious eternal life beyond the tomb; and since the 
Church was established as a haven of safety where 
men might not be blindly wrecked on the rocks of er- 
ror or engulfed in the whirlpools of evil, Jesus con- 
ferred on Peter the power to teach men with author- 
ity the truths of salvation, and to lead them by the use 
of proportionate and efficacious means in the ways of 
righteousness. Peter received likewise power of juris- 
diction, and was appointed center of this power. 
From him alone was to be distributed to others what- 
ever power of government there be in the Church. 
Moreover, all the followers of this religion, without 



Who Is the Pope? 7 

exception, were to be subject to him under penalty of 
forfeiting membership in the Christian flock of which 
the Pope is the Pastor. From this comes the right 
and duty of the Pope to teach Christians religion, to 
govern and guard them as a shepherd his sheep ; and 
from this arises the obligation of Christians to receive 
the teachings of the Pope and to submit to his direc- 
tion in spiritual matters. 

The Head of the Church and the Head of the State 
have, indeed, distinct fields of operation, and in their 
relations to each other are free and independent, each 
tending to his own end. Nevertheless, as the subjects 
of both are often the same, it not infrequently hap- 
pens that in the practical work of government there 
are points of contact, overlappings, misunderstand- 
ings, and even conflicts. In such cases where a peace- 
able, spontaneous adjustment is not possible, the right 
to prevail belongs to the Head of the Church, for the 
evident reason that the society he presides over has a 
higher and nobler end than the civil society, which is 
secondary and transitory. 

From this we can see the inexactness of the well- 
known formula ''A Free Church in a Free State" as 
if the Church were contained in the State as the lesser 
within the greater. From this it follows, too, that the 
State in its attitude toward the Church should encour- 
age and assist in the attainment of the efforts of her 
who is to guide men in the ways of virtue and perfec- 
tion prescribed by God. 

But this synthetic and brief reply to the question, 
^'Who is the Pope?" which certainly fills and satisfies 
the minds and hearts of the members of the Church, is 
not taken into account by those who do not believe in 



8 The Pope and Italy. 

the Church. These who whether consciously or not 
follow that school of thought which does not permit its 
followers to look beyond the horizon of sensible phe- 
nomena, and limits all things and their reasons to the 
narrow confines of this little world, do not at all appre- 
ciate how much we can learn from the teaching of 
theology, which looks beyond and above the fragile, 
confused grouping of events that fall under our de- 
fective control. Hence to the question of non-members 
of the Church, ''Who is the Pope?" we must give an 
answer that is not based on the divine origin of the 
Papacy. Although in any case we must come back to 
this origin, our answer must appeal to such historical 
evidence as all must grant, and of which, if we be 
reasonable at all, we can and must take notice. 

Having premised this, we may give, with historical 
exactness, the following reply. The Pope, as may be 
verified by the testimony of the senses, is that person 
who has residence in Kome and who presides there, 
with supreme authority, over an organization number- 
ing several hundred million souls. The existence of 
this society,, for almost two thousand years up to the 
present day, is proved, in a thousand divers ways, by 
evidence, oral, written, painted, and sculptured every- 
where. Despite perpetual opposition, the universal 
Church has neither failed nor ceased to function. Her 
invincible strength increases from the persecutions she 
suffers. Her irresistible power has spread, more or 
less rapidly but unfailingly, over all portions of the 
globe. So true is this that there is not in the world a 
single State in which the members of this Church do 
not constitute, if not the large majority, at least 
a part of its citizens. Her doctrines and funda- 



Who Is the Pope? 9 

mental theories exercise a powerful influence every- 
where, even in the midst of those who seek to contra- 
dict them; for these doctrines are like light which 
penetrates into every corner and illumines even those 
who fight against it. So that, in a certain sense, all 
the world is Christian since none of its regions has 
been able to escape the light of Christianity, while all, 
willing or not, have been pervaded by it. 

Now, the visible and temporal Head of this Chris- 
tian Society is the Pope, whose existence and immense 
influence no one can ignore, or escape. One may in- 
deed personally hate the Pope. One perhaps could 
force oneself to disregard him, but one can never deny 
that he exists, nor can one avoid perceiving in some 
way the effects of his existence, just as one cannot 
deny the existence of the sun. 

When statistics show us a list of three hundred 
million men with a hundred thousand bishops and 
priests and with a Supreme Head at whose command 
minds and hearts in all points of the earth yield 
obedience, can any one in the world in his right senses, 
even though he be a non-believer, refuse to admit this 
fact, and recognize that this Supreme Head with the 
prerogatives which constitute and characterize him, 
really exists, actually rules and is in fact the Pope? 
When the indisputable facts of history proclaim that 
for centuries the Pope, whether the object of love or 
of hate, of blessings or of curses, has continued to dis- 
charge his high office of guide to me^, shall any one 
dare deny that the Pope actually exists ^nd continues 
to influence the world by the majesty and sublimity of 
his authority? 

The Pope exists, but not from yesterday, for before 



10 The Pope and Italy. 

the present Pope Benedict XV there have been 259 
others who have exercised the same office. It would be 
sufficient to visit any library which is not confined to 
books of imagination exclusively and cast a glance over 
its catalogue to discover immediately, in every cen- 
tury from the beginning of the Christian era down to 
the present day, most striking evidences of the exist- 
ence and authority of the Pope. Moreover, these evi- 
dences are found so deeply imbedded in every field of 
human endeavor that to destroy the traces of the 
Papacy one would have to wrench, as it were, the 
earth from its poles and reduce the terrestrial globe 
to dust and scatter its atoms into limitless space. 

The decisive word of the Pope was heard at Jerusa- 
lem at the election of one of the twelve pillars of the 
Church, also at the Council which settled the disputed 
question of circumcision. In the first three centuries 
of the Christian era in the face of bloody persecutions, 
thirty Popes suffered martyrdom. From the fourth 
to the nineteenth century, in confirming and sanction- 
ing the wise deliberations of twenty General Councils, 
at which were framed laws for all men, the Popes 
have exercise'd their august power. It was the au- 
thority of the Pope that gave form and force to the 
underlying body of salutary laws which today regu- 
late the customs of all Christian peoples. For many 
centuries it was the Pope who in religious disputes, 
and often in political and social ones as well, pro- 
nounced the final sentence, from which there was no 
appeal, thereby bringing peace to souls and giving an 
impetus to the progress of true knowledge and sound 
moralit}^ And it must be admitted that the name of 
the Pope was and is gloriously written in indelible 



Benedict XV. 11 

characters on all the wonderful manifestations of the 
arts and sciences, and in all truly great and beneficent 
works. What else do the very struggles, the very per- 
secutions directed against the Pope manifest if not 
his authorit}^ and his great influence f The Pope may 
be likened to truth, which, in the expression of Augus- 
tine, is affirmed in its denial no less than in its asser- 
tion. 



CHAPTER IV. 

BENEDICT XV. 

BUT without going back to the past, it is easy to dis- 
cover who and what the Pope is by observing him 
in our own days. As is well known, the greatness of a 
Pope is derived in small part from his personal mer- 
its. Among the hundreds of Popes who have sat in 
the Chair of Peter, not all have been equal in moral 
worth or intellectual eminence. As a matter of fact, 
there have been some, though few in number and to a 
lesser degree than partisan historians would have us 
believe, who have not been credited with all those 
sublime virtues which should adorn persons of such 
exalted station. In general, however, the Popes, nor 
does any historian question the fact, were learned and 
holy men. But the supremacy and distinction they 
enjoyed arose, not so much from their personal learn- 
ing and sanctity, as from the sovereign office of Pope 
which they occupied. 

Let us now turn a reverent glance toward the present 
reigning Pontiff, Benedict XV. As noble youth, as 
painstaking student, as zealous priest, as prelate co- 



12 The Pope and Italy. 

operating so ably with Leo XIII and Pius X in the gov- 
ernment of the Church, as an indefatigable bishop in 
charge of a vast diocese, in every post has he stood 
out as a man of sterling character. But like many 
such persons in the world, inferior in rank, Giacomo 
Delia Chiesa, though admired deeply by all who knew 
him personally, made his way through life doing good, 
but receiving for it little general recognition. 

One day, however, Giacomo Delia Chiesa was elected 
by the College of Cardinals to preside over the des- 
tinies of the Christian Church. As the majesty of 
the pontifical throne raised this exemplary Prelate to 
a higher plane, his merits shone forth with a new and 
dazzling splendor. The sceptre of power, which he 
fain would have refused, made him a Sovereign, while 
the Papacy elevated him to a position above all human 
beings. From that day onward the eyes of the entire 
world have turned to him ; for humanity, driven on as 
it were by hidden forces, has looked to him for solace 
and relief in its sufferings and for light with which to 
guide its ways. 

As Pope Benedict XV, Giacomo Delia Chiesa was 
indeed destined to stand the supreme test of a sublime 
character. In August, 1914, burst forth, as all know, 
the bloody and terrible storm that scattered ruin and 
sorrow among the nations. An earthquake of moral 
upheaval accompanied it substituting might for right — 
the philosophy of Nietzsche for the religion of Jesus. 
Everywhere were the works of civilization suspended 
and destroyed ; thrones tottered ; and the Handwriting 
on the Wall told, in ineffaceable characters, the failure 
of our much-lauded hmnan science. Amid world-wide 
devastation, there was one person that remained calm, 



Benedict XV. 13 

unprejudiced, self-possessed. Like an oak witnessing 
the destruction by the hurricane of the surrounding 
forest, that person alone stood out majestically, ap- 
proving the right and condemning the wrong — and 
that person was the Pope. 

Amid the accumulating perils of this situation, the 
Holy Father showed the deepest interest in his af- 
flicted children. He consoled the sorrowing and suc- 
cored the helpless. He secured the exchange of pris- 
oners, restored them to their country and firesides, 
and in a thousand unseen ways aided and blessed 
them. Each day he would plead with the Most High 
on behalf of a war-torn world, and each day he would 
enjoin solemn public prayer, calling out to all in a 
voice broken Avith grief : ''Peace! Peace!" Ever un- 
heeded, his counsel, so efficacious for the freedom and 
salvation of a madly struggling world, was ever re- 
peated, without weariness and without resentment. 
His words sprang from a father's heart, and, though 
not followed, were not without effect. His voice was 
the voice of one vested with authority, and his posi- 
tion transcending all was able to aid all. The influ- 
ence of his moral power extended from pole to pole; 
it touched, penetrated, and pervaded the universal 
heart of mankind. On this momentous occasion, he 
inscribed a page in the historj^ of the Papacy, and it 
will ever be esteemed a page of glory.* 



* On August 1, 1917, as is well known, Benedict XV, in a fatherly- 
spirit of mediation, addressed to the Powers at war a Peace Note contain- 
ing certain general principles for the reconciliation of nations, and invited 
them to open negotiations on the subject. Since, however, the acceptance 
of this note, despite the fact that it contained the principles for the 
ultimate establishment of peace and the welfare of humanity, would 



14 The Pope and Italy. 

And hmnanity knows it, feels and says it, and con- 
fesses that to render efficacious and concrete the uni- 
versal desires of civilization and of peace, Leagues or 
Societies of Nations are of no avail without the form 
or sanctions of religion; and that we must turn to 
the Sovereign Pontiff to find a place where all nations 
may stand. Such is the person of the Pope in the 
eyes of believers and non-believers alike, for even 
non-believers are witnesses to his position. 



have implied a moral triumph for the Holy See, the adversaries of the 
Pope, who in the Treaty of London (November 30, 1915) had expressly 
agreed that he should in no wise have any part in the coming treaties of 
peace, rejected it, misinterpretiug its purpose and its meaning, pretend- 
ing to detect in it hostile designs towards Italy. The falsity of these 
charges was shown by subsequent events and by an able letter written 
November 8, 1918, by Cardinal P. Gasparri, Papal Secretary of State. 
A second Peace Note, substantially the same as the Pope's though in 
some respects less complete and less efficacious than his, was proffered 
(January, 1918) by Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States. 
He, however, unlike the Pope, who had acted simply as a moral philos- 
opher and as a kind-hearted and fatherly peace-loving teacher, added 
to his note the suggestion of arms and gold. Consequently, his note 
was acclaimed to the skies and welcomed and applauded. Alas, for the 
misery of mankind! 

One may recall that in the said Peace Note the Pope, his paternal 
heart bleeding at the awful carnage of millions of human beings of 
every land, had styled the war a useless slaughter, adapting the phrase 
from Horace's hella matribus detestata, particularly since in view of his 
proposals for peace the slaughter was senseless and should have been 
stopped. But even that euphemistic utterance of his fatherly grief 
was seized upon by his enemies as a pretext for grief and bitterness at 
the base and sinister designs they made believe were couched thereiu. 
Time, however, has unmasked their hypocrisy. 



Aims of the Papacy. 15 



CHAPTER V. 

AIMS OF THE PAPACY. 

TO be ill a position to know better who the Pope is 
and to determine and understand his rights and 
duties, we should know the purpose and aims of the 
high office he fills, since, as is obvious, the nature 
of a thing is determined by the end for which it exists 
and to which it tends. Now, the of&ce of the Pope, the 
nature of which for the members of the Church is de- 
termined by supernatural arguments such as are con- 
tained in those passages of the Gospel where Peter is 
given the authority to teach, make laws and to direct 
all people in the ways which lead to eternal life, is not 
unknown even to those who reject the Gospel and pre- 
fer to believe only those facts which can be attested 
by observation. We must account as indisputable 
facts the wonderful activity and fecundity of the 
Papacy during the twenty centuries of its existence 
devoted entirely (why deny it?) to the welfare of hu- 
manity. In proof of this it suffices to cast a cursory 
glance over the instructive and interesting works of 
theology, philosophy, and literature that have, under 
the guidance of the Pope, appeared in every epoch. 
It should be enough to examine attentively such a won- 
derful monument of A\dsdom as the body of Canon 
Law, published for the government of Christians by 
the Pontiffs, the jurisprudence of which, inspired as it 
has always been by truth, justice and the conscious- 
ness of man's destiny, has been a strong and salutary 
defense of right and an effective preventive of injus- 



16 The Pope and Italy. 

tice. To prove this it is sufficient to read the annals 
of the times when the Pope ruled with mercy and 
justice the peoples confided to him. 

As one of the honors of the Papacy we may mention 
the habits of life which have distinguished Christians 
as a class of honorable and virtuous men, rendering 
them more than others obedient to the laws of the 
State. The glory of the Papacy may be seen in the 
churches and the works of art of every description 
found throughout the world which are traceable to its 
direction or inspiration, and which constitute an orna- 
ment to cities and a spiritual monument to individuals 
and nations. 

To the Papacy must be attributed the patient labor, 
in the maligned Middle Ages, of the monastic orders 
who rescued from oblivion and preserved for posterity 
the literary treasures of Latin civilization which 
otherwise would have been lost. Eedounding, too, to 
the credit of the Papacy are the many Christian insti- 
tutions which it has founded, promoted, aided or en- 
couraged, and which have filled the world with works 
of philanthropy and charity. To the Papacy is due 
the heroic preaching by which the missionaries 
brought Christianity and civilization to unexplored 
regions and joined the names of Rome and Italy with 
that of the Pope. Finally, there is not perhaps any 
truly great work in the world, nor any great manifes- 
tation of goodness and of truth to which there is not 
linked, in some way or other, together with the name 
of Christianity that of the Pope, who, being the Ruler 
and Teacher of the Christian religion is, by right, as 
in fact, the depositary of Christianity. 

This historical record of achievement brings out in 



Special Independence of the Pope. 17 

bold relief the aims of the Papacy in this world. In 
keeping with its essential doctrines and the nature of 
Christianity, it seeks to win men to the worship of 
God, inducing them to observe all divine and human 
laws, to submit to all constituted authority, and to 
contribute in the best way possible to the prosperity 
and success of their native country. It endeavors to 
assist all governments of the earth in the betterment 
of their people and in their acquisition of Christian 
culture. To deny that this is the purpose of the 
Papacy is to deny a fact which stands forth to-day, as 
it has stood heretofore, visible to all who do not close 
their eyes. 



CHAPTER VI. 

SPECIAL IK'nEPENDENCE OF THE POPE. 

THE special characteristic of the Pope in the dis- 
charge of his office and in the government of the 
Church is his absolute independence as regards the 
entire human race, a prerogative not found in any 
other potentate on earth. The Pope, in fact, is identi- 
fied with the Church and is its embodiment, as it were. 
He does not depend on this or that individual or so- 
ciety, on this or that human authority, but he exists 
and exercises his functions like a thing of nature in- 
dependently of others, precisely like the Church itself, 
which philosophers might tell us is related to the Pope 
as matter is to form. In fact, the two terms. Pope and 
Church, are correlative, the one supposes the other and 
receives from it its being; and if one were to be lack- 
ing, the other would likewise be lacking. The reason 



18 The Pope and Italy. 

of all this lies in the fact that the Papacy is not only 
the highest office in the Church, but it is likewise the 
source and center of the teaching and of every other 
spiritual power of jurisdiction through which the 
Church lives. This, then, is the intrinsic reason on 
account of which the Pope, de facto and de jure, is and 
must be independent and absolutely free from any out- 
side power in the government and control of the 
Church. This independence is likewise due to him be- 
cause it has so intimate a relation with his impartiality 
that this latter, so essential for the Papal mission, 
could not even be conceived without it.* 

Among other reasons which show the necessity of 
liberty and independence on the part of the Pope in 
the discharge of his office we might enumerate the 
nobility and superiority of the Christian Church and 
of its ends in comparison with any other existing so- 
ciety; the universality of the Christian Common- 
wealth, which is not limited by seas, mountains, politi- 
cal titles or barriers of any kind ; the character of the 
pontifical authority, which has reference not merely to 
the exterior life of men, but penetrates into the depths 
of the soul and through its commands and inhibitions 
establishes therein a moral responsibility. So essen- 
tial, so fundamental is this liberty, this independence 
in the Papal mission, that for no reason in the Avorld 
could the Popes surrender it. In fact they have many 
times allowed themselves to be slain in its defense. 



* The necessity of the Pope's impartiality towards all was shown in a 
conspicuous manner during the war, when the various peoples kept a 
watchful eye on the Vatican, commenting on the words and silences of 
the Pope, and becoming greatly agitated at the mere suspicion of his 
partiality. 



Spiritual, Temporal and Territorial Dominion. 19 



CHAPTER VII. 

SPIEITUAL, TEMPORAL AND TERRITORIAL DOMINION. 

nnHE dominion or sovereignty which the Pope exer- 
•■■ cises over Christians is said to be and is spiritual 
in so far as it regards the spiritual life of his subjects ; 
it is said to be and is temporal in the sense that, 
through a system of ecclesiastical laws and regula- 
tions which comprise the internal and external forum 
of the Church, he directs with authority Christians in 
their life here upon earth, and in keeping with the na- 
ture of Christianity and of the Church, which is visi- 
ble and temporal, reigns visibly over them. In this 
sense all the governments and forms of authority of 
this world, inasmuch as they exist and function in 
time are said to be and are temporal, even though they 
be not territorial. Here it may not be out of place to 
note that the use which has prevailed of identifying 
the temporal sovereignty or dominion of the Pope 
with his territorial sovereignty or dominion, has pro- 
duced the unfortunate result of calling temporalists 
or non-temp oralists those who assert or deny the ter- 
ritorial dominion of the Pope. It would be better, 
perhaps, to distinguish clearly between spiritual, tem- 
poral, and territorial dominion. 

The first two types of Papal dominion, in the sense 
above indicated, extend over the entire world and are 
readily admitted by all, with the exception, perhaps, 
of certain non-Catholics, who, not willing to admit that 
the Church is a visible society and not being able to 



20 The Pope and Italy. 

deny to the Pope the fact of visible and temporal sov- 
ereignty, attempt to challenge his right to such do- 
minion. The third type, namely, territorial dominion, 
which has particular reference to the nation in which 
the Pope has his See and to which he lays claim in so 
far as it may be necessary to his office, is an evident 
consequence of the other two, which could neither be 
applied nor exercised without it. 

Nevertheless, it is this territorial dominion which, 
through misunderstanding on the part of the ignorant 
and through prejudice and preconceptions on the part 
of those that hate the Church, gives rise to dissensions, 
divisions and even, we must confess, to persecutions. 

This, too, is the knotty point to which as a pretext 
are attributed today all the differences and suspicions 
in the relations between the Holy See and the State of 
Italy. It is this point which, in the eyes of many, in 
good or bad faith, perverts every act of Catholics and 
constantly furnishes the motive of hatefully calling 
the friends of the Pope enemies of Italy. It is this 
aspect, then, of the problem that we must clearly and 
calmly explain, if we would contribute to that definite 
accord which is so ardently desired by all who truly 
love Italy. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

THE ROMAN QUESTION. 

AS every one knows, up to September, 1870, the Pope 
was also a Civil Ruler and ruled several provinces 
in Central Italy, which together with Rome, went to make 
up the Patrimony of St. Peter. No serious and impar- 



The Roman Question. 21 

tial historian can question the original title of that do- 
minion maintained legitimately for so many centuries. 
The abandonment of Rome and the Exarchate on the 
part of the Byzantine Emperors was the determining 
fact that in the beginning made necessary the civil 
government of the Pope, which was thus originally 
only de facto, though afterward, through the free rec- 
ognition and submission to it on the part of the peo- 
ple, it became de jure. The subsequent attempts of 
the Lombards to seize control of the Roman provinces 
caused the intervention of Pepin and the Franks ; and 
brought about the restitution of the invaded territory 
to the Pope — a deed afterwards confirmed by treaties 
and by the constant consent of the people. No one can, 
therefore, reasonably attack in any way the legitimate 
character of that dominion either in its origin or in the 
subsequent course of its existence. 

The title of the Pope to civil dominion was thus a 
double one. The first, like that of every other earthly 
legitimate ruler, was derived from the will of the 
people and the force of historical events. The other 
arose from the need of the Papacy to exercise freely 
and independently its world mission. The first was 
subject to the vicissitudes of human politics and to the 
power of prescription in the vortex of time. The 
other was inseparably inherent in the existence and 
actual exigency of the Papacy, inviolate and, like the 
Papacy itself, impervious to prescription. This double 
title of the Pope should never be lost sight of by those 
who would form a correct judgment on the so-called 
Roman Question in its present circumstances. 

When attempts were made in the second half of the 
nineteenth century to unify Italy by abolishing its 



22 The Pope and Italy. 

many independent States, those in control of the move- 
ment were unwilling to make any exception even in 
favor of the Pope, who was thereupon despoiled of his 
kingdom. This act of forcible despoliation was in- 
tended to destroy, not only the Pope's title to civil 
dominion, which is subject to prescription, but also his 
title to independent spiritual sovereignty, which is 
inviolate and impervious to prescription. But the 
Pope, we repeat, was not simply a Civil Prince ; he was 
likewise the Head of Christians throughout the world. 
Consequently, as his little territorial dominion fur- 
nished sufficient title to guarantee him that absolute 
independence and liberty requisite for the exercise of 
his high office, he could do no less, on the forcible de- 
spoilment of this territory from him, than strongly 
protest to the entire world and vehemently demand, 
not merely as a Civil Euler despoiled of his kingdom, 
but as a Pontiif deprived of his necessary liberty, that 
his dominion be restored to him. 

The new Italian State realized that the Pope could 
not be treated after the fashion of other despoiled 
princes; it realized, too, that the unification of Italy 
would have to be accomplished with due regard to 
the Pope's world-wide sovereignty; wherefore it en- 
deavored to make reparations. 

To make proper reparations for its errors, the 
Italian State should have either restored to the Pope 
his small kingdom or should have given him some- 
thing equivalent, which, in the judgment of the Pope 
himself, would have assured him of the full liberty 
and complete independence indispensably necessary 
for him. In any case, natural equity and ordinary 
common sense would have suggested that the State 



The Law of Guarantees. 23 

treat directly with the Pope, as the party most inter- 
ested. But at this point the Italian State fell, unfor- 
tunately, into a second error. On its own initiative, 
without negotiating with the Pontiff or hearing him, 
it elaborated, after the manner of a victor, the law on 
"The Prerogatives of the Supreme Pontiff and the 
Holy See and the Kelation between the Church and 
State," commonly called the Law of Guarantees, and 
on May 13, 1871, published it, acting much after the 
way a victorious enemy would have acted toward a 
prisoner of war, for whom he would lay down regula- 
tions without taking counsel with him. 



CHAPTEE IX. 

THE LAW OF GUAEANTEES. 

WAS it possible that the Pope could ignore this 
new outrage and accept the arbitrary dispositions 
of the law and declare himself satisfied with it? Pre- 
scinding both from the way in which the law was en- 
acted and from its contents, which have been found, 
moreover, insufficient and inept, how could he have 
submitted to the will and pleasure of the Italian State ? 
How could he, whose kingdom extends from one end 
of the world to the other, disregard the eternal prin- 
ciples of that inviolable liberty and absolute ultra- 
international independence with which he must guide 
the destinies of the Church and submit to an abuse of 
power which would render him a subject of the State? 
It was all too evident that such a law, far from 
remedying the preceding acts of injustice, constituted 



24 The Pope and Italy. 

a fresh one ; all the more so since the State itself had 
declared the law to be purely national and internal in 
character and hence revocable at will. 

Nevertheless, the Law of Guarantees, notwithstand- 
ing that it does him a grave injustice, has a deep po- 
litical significance favorable to the Pope. Certainly, 
the mere fact of the existence of this law forms a 
precious proof of the universality and political im- 
portance of the Papacy. After having invaded the 
territory of the Pope the Italian State felt the need of 
demonstrating to the Powers that, though it had taken 
possession of these provinces and had dispossessed 
their temporal Sovereign, it had nevertheless respected 
and intended to respect the prerogatives of world sov- 
ereignty inherent in the Head of the Church. So in the 
hope of satisfying and placating the convictions and 
sentiment of all the nations on the universality of the 
Papacy, the Italian Government hastened, though with 
unhappy results, to enact the law. This method of 
procedure constitutes something truly unique in his- 
tory. For nothing like it ever happened before to a 
civil ruler despoiled of his kingdom, nor to any of his 
successors. Thus did the power and ultra-national 
sovereignty of the Pontiff receive from another source 
a new confirmation, which, though begrudgingly given, 
is yet of no small value. 

But the law itself, so significant in character, con- 
tains numerous substantial defects. It has turned out 
to be an unfortunate expedient, contrary to the pur- 
pose and to the end alike which induced the State to 
enact it. The purpose was the evident fact that the 
Pope, deprived of his throne, yet remained as before 
the Supreme Universal Head of the Christian Church, 



The Law of Guarantees. 25 

recognized as such by all. Hence arose the need on 
the part of the State to devise some special treatment 
for him which would quiet the anxieties of Christians 
and of the Powers. But that treatment should have 
been worthy of the motive which created it ; that is, it 
should have been worthy of the ultra-national sov- 
ereignty of the Pope and of the greatness and spiritual 
liberty of the Church. Wherefore, a first essential con- 
dition in the devising of that treatment should have 
been the participation in it of all Christians through 
their governments. More important even should have 
been considered the participation in it of him who, as 
Supreme Head of the Church, was to be the principal 
object, nay, the sole object, of the measures to be 
adopted. This had been said and proclaimed publicly 
many times by the directors of the new State. In fact, 
the First Italian Parliament, in the celebrated session 
of February 21, 1861, in Turin, discussing the im- 
portant matter of the unification of Italy, received and 
approved a report presented by Senator Matteuci in 
the name of the Senatorial Commission, in which, after 
alluding to the diplomatic advantages which the nation 
anticipated from other States as the result of unity, 
he added : ' ' These States, like ourselves zealous guard- 
ians of peace and good order, will add new force to the 
authority of the Government and of the First Italian 
Parliament, so that with the wisdom and moderation, 
which should control the counsels of a large kingdom, 
a solution may be found for the difficult problems 
which are of interest to the peace of Italy and of the 
world, as well as for the greatness and spiritual liberty 
of the Church." 

In the Parliament of Florence in the session of De- 



26 The Pope and Italy. 

cember 21, 1870, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mar- 
chese Emilio Visconti Venosta, whose words cannot be 
suspected as favoring the Pope, replying to a member 
who attempted to dissuade him from negotiating with 
the other Powers concerning the status of the Pope, 
and who urged him not to take up the matter at all, 
expressed himself as follows : ' ' This is an international 
question. We cannot refuse to recognize the uni- 
versal character of the Papacy in the exercise of its 
religious functions as regards Catholics throughout the 
entire world, and the interest of every government hav- 
ing a Catholic population that the Holy See should not 
become a subject or be subjected to the particular sov- 
ereignty of any one State. This is derived, gentlemen, 
from the particular character which is peculiar to the 
organization of the Catholic Church, a character which 
differs substantially from that of other churches. The 
Pontiff is not merely Head of Italian Catholics. He rep- 
resents the Supreme religious power, exercising juris- 
diction over Catholic organizations which form parts 
of other States, and as an Ecclesiastical Power he has 
with these other States concordats and contracts of an 
international form which regulate and at the same time 
recognize this jurisdiction. There is perhaps no one 
in this assembly who, among the rights which the Pon- 
tiff maintains, would deny him the right of receiving 
and maintaining at his Court representatives of other 
Powers to treat with them concerning the religious in- 
terests of their States. Now, gentlemen, would a sim- 
ilar privilege be accorded to the Archbishop of Flor- 
ence or to the Archbishop of Turin, whose authority 
does not extend beyond the confines of the kingdom 
and who are Italian subjects? To recognize the right 



The Law of Guarantees. 27 

of the Pope to receive diplomatic representatives and 
to deny at the same time the existence of an interna- 
tional character in the juridical situation of the Papacy 
as a religious institution seems to me to be an evident 
contradiction. ' ' 

In keeping with these principles, Marchese Visconti 
Venosta, on September 7, 1870, published a circular 
letter in which it was stated ' ' that Italy was ready to 
enter into negotiations with other States concerning 
the conditions to be determined upon by common con- 
sent, to guarantee the spiritual independence of the 
Pontiff. ' ' It was always the liberty and complete inde- 
pendence of the Pope which was proclaimed as it were 
with affected insistence, and its basis wa^ precisely the 
nature of his sovereignty. Victor Emanuel II himself 
in a letter written to Pius IX from Florence on Sep- 
tember 8, 1870, that is, twelve days before the occupa- 
tion of Eome, protested in the strongest terms that 
he had constantly endeavored and with unceasing per- 
severance would seek to put into practice his senti- 
ments of reconciliation, ' ' that the Head of the Catholic 
Church, surrounded by the devotion of the Italian 
peoples should maintain upon the banks of the Tiber a 
glorious See independent of every human sov- 
ereignty. " 

All this goes to show clearly that the Eoman Ques- 
tion, created by the manner in which Italy was unified, 
was, properly considered, not a mere internal question 
to be decided by a one-sided law of the State, but an 
ultra-national question of exceptional character which 
could not be settled without the intervention of the 
Powers who wordd protect the interests of their sub- 
jects and especially without the intervention and the 



28 The Pope and Italy. 

full consent of the Pope. The Italian Government 
acted instead quite differently and did the opposite of 
what it should have done. It did not interest itself at 
all about what Christian people might think concerning 
this important question, nor did it consider what just 
and lawful claims the Pope might have. Losing sight 
of the purpose which it had asserted would animate it 
in considering the position of the Pontiff, it elaborated 
by itself and for itself the Law of Guarantees and pub- 
lished it as the most natural thing in the world. 

A superficial examination of this law would immedi- 
ately create the impression of a generous and kind act 
on the part of the Government of Italy towards the 
Pope. The articles number nineteen ; the first thirteen 
grant in generous tones concessions to the person of 
the Pontiff and the Holy See. The remaining six con- 
tain determinations relating to the clergy and to the 
Church in Italy. The text follows : 

I. THE PKEROGATIVES OF THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF AND THE 

HOLY SEE. 

1. The person of the Sovereign Pontiff shall be sacred and in- 
violable. 

2. All attempts against the person of the Sovereign Pontiff and 
provocation to commit the same, shall be punishable with the same 
punishments as attempts and provocations of the same kind against 
the person of the King. Public attacks and offenses against the per- 
son of the Pontiff, whether by words, deeds or other means mentioned 
in the Law of the Press shall be punished with the penalties con- 
tained in the same law. The said crimes shall be of public action' 
and belong to the competence of the criminal court. Discussion on 
religious questions shall be absolutely free. 

3. The Italian Government shall render to the Supreme Pontiff 
in the territory of the kingdom the honors of a Sovereign. He shall 
enjoy aU the rights of pre-eminence which Catholic Sovereig^ns 



The Law of Guarantees. 29 

recognize in him. The Supreme Pontiff shall have the right to main- 
tain the customary number of guards attached to his person and 
assigned to the custody of his palaces without any prejudice to the 
obligations and duties devolving on said guards by reason of the 
existing laws of the kingdom. 

4. There shall be set aside in favor of the Holy See an annual 
income of 3,225,000 lire. This sum, equal in amount to that found 
in the Roman Budget under the titles, "Sacred Apostolic Palaces, 
Sacred College, Ecclesiastical Congregations, Secretariate of State, 
and Foreign Diplomatic Service," shall include provisions for the 
support of the Supreme Pontiff, the various ecclesiastical needs of 
the Holy See, the ordinary and extraordinary maintenance as well 
as the guarding of the apostolic palaces and their dependencies; for 
the salaries and pensions of those attached to the Papal Court and 
their expenses; likewise for the ordinary up-keep and guarding of 
the attached museums and library as well as for the salaries, stipends 
and pensions of thos6 employed therein. The above-mentioned sum 
shall be incorporated in the Public Debt of the State in the form 
of a perpetual and inalienable income in favor of the Holy See. 
During the interval in which the Papal See is unoccupied it shall 
be continued for the payment of all necessary expenses contracted 
during that period. This sum shall be free from all local, provincial 
or national taxes or imposts. It shall not be lessened except in the 
event that the Italian Government should later on decide to assume 
itself responsibility for the expenses of the museums and library. 

5. The Supreme Pontiff, besides the established income of the 
preceding article shall continue to possess the Vatican and Lateran 
Apostolic Palaces, together with their attached or dependent build- 
ings, gardens and grounds, as well as the Villa of Castel Gondolfo 
with its attachments and dependencies. The said palaces, villa and 
attachments as likewise the museums and library and the collections 
of art and archaeology existing therein shall be inalienably free from 
all tax or impost, as well as from expropriation for the cause of 
public utility. 

6. During the period when the Pontifical See is vacant no 
political or judiciary power shall for any cause whatsoever impede 
or limit the personal freedom of the Cardinals. The Government 
shall make provision that the assemblies of the Conclave and of 
Ecumenical Councils shall not be disturbed by any external force. 



30 The Pope and Italy. 

7. No public official or agent of the police shall, in the exercise 
of his office, enter any palace or place of temporary or habitual 
residence of the Supreme Pontiff, or wherever there be an assembly 
of a Conclave or Ecumenical Council, unless authorized to do so by 
the Supreme Pontiff or the Council. 

8. The inspection, examination or sequestration of letters, docu- 
ments, books or registers belonging to the Papal Offices and Congre- 
gations which discharge merely spiritual functions shall be for- 
bidden. 

9. The Supreme Pontiff shall be entirely free to discharge all 
the functions of his spiritual ministry and to cause to be affixed to 
the doors of the basilicas and churches of Rome, all the acts of the 
said ministry. 

10. All ecclesiastics who in Rome officially assist the Holy See in 
the functions of its spiritual ministry shall not, on that account, be 
subjected to any interference, investigation or accounting on the 
part of the officials of the State; all foreigners occupying ecclesi- 
astical offices in Rome shall enjoy all the personal guarantees which 
Italian citizens enjoy by virtue of the laws of the kingdom. 

11. Representatives of Foreign Governments at the Holy See 
shall enjoy all the prerogatives and immunity which international 
law accords to diplomatic agents. Offences committed against them 
shall be punished in the same way as offences committed against 
representatives of Foreign Powers at the Italian Court. They shall 
moreover enjoy in 'the kingdom the usual privileges and immunity, 
in accordance with the same law, in going to and coming from the 
place of their mission. 

12. The Supreme Pontiff shall correspond freely with the Epis- 
copate and entire Catholic world without any interference on the 
part of the Italian Government. Permission is hereby accorded him 
to open postal and telegraphic offices in the Vatican or in his other 
residences under the charge of employes of his own choice. The 
Papal post office may correspond directly through sealed packages 
with the post offices of foreign administrations. In both cases the 
transportation of despatches and correspondence marked by the 
papal seal shall be exempt, in the territory of Italy, from all taxes 
and expenses. Mail sent in the name of the Supreme Pontiff shall 
be considered the same in Italy as mail sent in the name of Foreign 
Governments. The papal telegraph office shall be linked up at the 



The Law of Guarantees. 31 

expense of the State with the telegraph system of the kingdom. 
Telegrams transmitted by the said office marked with the official 
designation ''papal" shall be received and sent with the same pre- 
rogatives as State telegrams, free from all taxes in the kingdom. 
Telegi-ams of the Supreme Pontiff shall enjoy the same privilege 
when, signed with the seal of the Holy See, they are presented at any 
telegraph office in the kingdom. Telegrams addressed to the Supreme 
Pontiff shall be exempt from all taxes chargeable to the recipient. 

13, Seminaries, academies, colleges and other Catholic institutes 
founded for the education and culture of ecclesiastics in Rome and 
in the six Suburban Sees shall continue to depend exclusively upon 
the Holy See, without any interference on the part of the school 
authorities of the kingdom. 

II. KELATIOlsrS OF THE STATE TO THE CHURCH. 

14. All special restrictions on the exercise of the right of as- 
isembly on the part of members of the Catholic clergy are abolished. 

15. The Government renounces all rights to the apostolic lega^ 
tion in Sicily. It likewises renounces the right in the entire kingdom 
to name or propose candidates for major benefices. Bishops shall 
not be requested to take the oath to the King. Major and minor 
benefices can be conferred only on citizens of the kingdom except in 
Rome and the Suburban Sees. No innovation is made in the 
benefices over which the King has the right of patronage. 

16. The royal exequatur, the royal placet and every other form 
of Government approval required for the publication and execution 
lof the acts of ecclesiastical authorities are abolished. However, until 
•other provisions have been made as in article 18, all acts of ec- 
clesiastical authorities regarding the use of ecclesiastical property 
and the provisions of major and minor benefices, except those in the 
city of Rome and the Suburban Sees, shall remain subject to the 
Toyal exequatur and placet. The dispositions of the civil laws re- 
garding the creation, the manner of existence of ecclesiastical insti- 
tutes and the alienation of their property remain in force. 

17. In spiritual and disciplinary matters there shall be no appeal 
against the acts of ecclesiastical authorities, nor shall any sanction 
Tjy force be accorded or recognized regarding these acts. Their 
judicial effects, like those of any other act, shall be null and void if 
'Contrary to laws of the State or to the public order, or to the rights 



32 The Pope and Italy. 

of private citizens. If they constitute crimes they shall be subject to 
the penal laws. 

18. Provision shall be made in a future law for the maintainance 
and administration of ecclesiastical property in the kingdom. 

19. Any and every existing disposition, in so far as it may be 
contrary to the determinations of the present law, shall cease to 
have effect. 

If we reflect on the contents and form of this law,, 
even if we limit our reflections to its spirit and general 
outlines without attempting a critical analysis of its 
individual articles, extolled though they be by some 
writers as a monument of legal and political wisdom, 
disillusion and disappointments will immediately re- 
sult and the seeming generosity of the State will stand- 
revealed as the disguise of a disciplinary regulation. 
The Pope, who is not and cannot be any one's subject,, 
would, by force of the law, become a subject, nay, a 
pensioner of the State of Italy. In consequence of the- 
Law of Guarantees the high prerogatives of universal- 
ity in the dominion of the Pope would not only be 
much circumscribed but in a certain sense would even 
cease to exist. In the delimitations and the restrictions 
of these vaunted articles the exercise of the papal min- 
istry would no longer be protected and characterized' 
by that independence and that absolute liberty which 
is an essential quality of the office of the Pope bef ore- 
the world. 

This law, the interpretation of which would always 
be at the mercy of party politics, is clearly inadequate 
for the full and real sovereignty and the perpetuity of" 
the Papacy. It is contrary to the essence of the 
Papacy and would subject the Pope to the suspicion of 
having been influenced by Italy in all his acts. Fur- 



The Law of Guarantees. 33 

thermore, all that the law concedes to the Pontiff al- 
ready belonged to him by legitimate titles and to a 
larger degree and in a higher and nobler sense ; so that 
we may say that the State disposes in this law of things 
which do not belong to it. How self-evident, then, is 
the fundamental injustice of the Law of Guarantees! 
State control of the universal Papacy is a contradic- 
tion in terms. The suggested remedy for this obvious, 
injustice — the internationalization of the Law of Gruar- 
antees — suffers from a twofold fault, at once positive 
and negative. The vastness of international authority 
would but sanction this Law's substantial defects, 
which the vagueness of international operation could 
never counteract. But even if we were to grant that 
the prescriptions of the Law of Guarantees were suffi- 
cient for the free exercise of the mission of the Pope * 
they could not be accepted in their present form be- 
cause such an acceptance would signify, on the part of 
the Pope, dependence upon those who made the law or 
sanctioned it, by whom in consequence it could like- 
wise be abolished. 

The qualities and prerogatives of the Supreme Pon- 
tiff are such that while any one may on his own re- 
sponsibility respect or violate them, no one can cancel 
or annul them. When, therefore, the Italian State, in- 
stead of recognizing and respecting in the Pope as his 
inviolable rights all the prerogatives implied in the 



*An evident proof of the inefficacy and insufficiency of the Law of 
Guarantees under present circumstances to assure to the Pope free and 
full liberty in his mission appears in the fact that in 1915, at the out- 
break of hostilities, the representatives at the Papal Court of the coun- 
tries at war at the time with Italy found it necessary to leave the Holy 
See, notwithstanding that the Italian Government had courteously of- 
fered them protection. 



34 The Pope cmd Italy. 

universal sovereignty of the Papacy, endeavored on 
the contrary through its Law of Guarantees to make it 
appear that these prerogatives came to him from itself 
and were thus created in him as apparent concessions, 
then it is evident that the State, far from performing 
an act of respect and deference, not only failed in the 
devotion due to the Holy See and to justice, but in addi- 
tion committed a deplorable act of usurpation which 
can have no effect. 

We may conclude, then, that Italy, in publishing the 
Law of Guarantees, has not really acted in keeping 
with the motive which induced her to enact it, nor has 
she succeeded in attaining the end which she proposed 
to secure. Through this law she hoped to silence for- 
ever men of the Catholic faith; she felt, too, that the 
Pope would not examine too closely into the implica- 
tions of the law and that thus the Eoman Question 
would be dead and buried. This hope was a vain one. 
The Pope has never hesitated for an instant to reject 
the law. If under the circumstances he has had to 
take advantage of some of its concessions, he has done 
so not by reason of and in consequence of the law but 
despite it. Catholics of all countries, though not, to be 
sure, with the arms of force, clamor today as always 
for a solution of the; Roman Question which, then, only 
may be said to be dead when either Italy in full accord 
with the Pope has reached a proper solution, or when 
the Church itself has disappeared from the world. As 
long as the Church shall endure, as long as the claims 
of the Pope shall not have been recognized and ad- 
mitted, the Roman Question, whatever may be said or 
written to the contrary, shall remain a serious problem 
awaiting solution. 



The Claims of the Pope. 35 



CHAPTER X. 

THE CLAIMS OF THE POPE. 

WHAT, then, we may ask, are the claims of the 
Pope ? The Italian State has made the mistake of 
never having invited the Pope to state them. History 
will condemn this deplorable omission — an omission 
which should furnish an impartial investigator and 
critic sufficient grounds to suspect the existence of in- 
tentions none too scrupulous. How otherwise can we 
explain such a course of conduct on the part of one 
who has always boasted of having treated and of wish- 
ing to treat the Pope according to justice ? But let us 
talk no longer of this, lest we be forced to speak of the 
unconscionable methods of that nefarious sect which 
darkens and poisons every national enterprise. 

We must distinguish the claims which the Pope 
really advances from those which others attribute 
to him. If we would listen to his opponents, the Pope 's 
demands would imply nothing less than the ruin of 
Italy, the dissolution of her provinces and the dismem- 
berment of her national territory. To satisfy his de- 
sires for an independent government, which, according 
to them, he could do very well without, he would insist, 
they say, upon the restoration, either entirely or in 
part, of his former civil kingdom with its land and its 
people. Now this, they say, would redound to the 
detriment of Italy both as to territory and as to politi- 
cal power. Hence, they conclude, it would be im- 
possible for the State to consent to a settlement and to 
a peace with the Holy See. 



36 The Pope and Italy. 

When the case is presented on this basis and under 
these colors the obstacles to a peaceable solution would 
appear to be almost insurmountable. But in reality 
the case, if it be stated correctly, is quite different. 
The ruin, dissolution, and dismemberment of Italy as 
well as a consequent loss in land and political power 
are only artificial scarecrows constructed for the ig- 
noble purpose of frightening off any attempt at peace. 

In the first place, when we talk of national ruin and 
consider the Pope as the enemy of Italy (if by Italy 
one does not understand the lower and baser elements), 
we are being misled by bigotry and prejudice in stat- 
ing a fact which is contradicted not only by history 
but by the very nature of the Papacy. In refutation of 
this vile slander we might point to the mere existence 
of the Pope in the center of Italy, which in itself con- 
stitutes one of Italy's strongest titles to distinction. 
For the greatness and worth of the Papacy are re- 
flected, beyond the shadow of a doubt, directly and in- 
directly, in a thousand different ways on the place of 
his distinguished residence. 

''The Pontificate," wrote Leo XIII in a letter, June 
15, 1887, to Cardinal EampoUa, "through its lofty uni- 
versal and permanent mission belongs indeed to every 
nation; nevertheless, it is, by reason of the See as- 
signed it by Providence, the special glory of the Ital- 
ians." This fact, Italians living abroad realize well; 
for, by belonging to a nation in which the Pope resides, 
they are everywhere greeted with expressions of ad- 
miration and envy. Italians living at home realize it, 
too ; for they are witnesses of constant streams of pil- 
grims who in normal times are attracted to Italy from 
all quarters of the globe because of the Pontiff. It is 



The Claims of the Pope. 37 

proclaimed by the eloquence of facts from every corner 
of the nation, where art, science and beneficence make 
glorious the name of him who for many centnries from 
his sublime throne has contributed to their honor and 
advancement. Certainly, in the light of the facts no 
■one could reasonably maintain that the Pope has ever 
been an enemy of Italy. Nor can one logically conclude 
that in exacting means essential to the exercise of his 
pontifical mission he is animated by a spirit of hostility 
or by a desire for the destruction of Italy rather than 
by a spirit of special benevolence and desire for her 
preservation. 

According to others, the Pope would demand the 
dissolution and dismemberment of the Provinces of 
Italy with a consequent political and territorial loss 
■on the part of the nation. In point of fact, in no offi- 
•cial document has the Holy See ever demanded in the 
tragic form of her adversaries, the dissolution of Italy 
and the dreaded dismemberment of national territory. 
On the contrary, the long-standing dispute on the so- 
called Koman Question does not in its etymological 
sense regard directly and exclusively the material in- 
vasion of Roman territory. It has a deeper and more 
important meaning than that. It has reference chiefly 
to the abnormal conditions which have followed be- 
tween the Pope and his friends on the one hand and 
the Italian Government on the other. The principal 
object of the Pope's anxiety is not so much the mate- 
rial loss of land wrenched from him by force, as the 
dire consequences so injurious to the spiritual life and 
mission of the Head of the Church which have re- 
;sulted therefrom. 

We meet, indeed, two classes of Papal adversaries. 



38 The Pope and Italy. 

who complicate the Eoman Question by refusing to- 
face the real problem at issue. As usual, both err by 
extreme views — the one class by understatement, the 
other by overstatement. The first class derive a pre- 
text from the inactivity of the last half- century to re- 
peat incessantly that many phases of the Roman Ques- 
tion have already been settled and that nothing now 
remains but a trifling difference between the Vatican 
and the State that might occur even in friendly rela- 
tions. The second class of Papal opponents with 
feigned contempt make every effort to represent con- 
ditions in their most unfavorable aspect, never ceas- 
ing to proclaim that the Pope's inordinate ambition, 
meditates the dismemberment of Italy. Thus, both 
classes overlook the truth and deceive themselves and 
others, closing their eyes to the evidence of history 
and law, inherent in the very nature of things. The- 
truth is that the Roman Question turns primarily on 
the sad consequences of the total invasion of Papal 
territory; and though it does not refer necessarily to 
all the territory taken from the Holy See, it does refer 
to some territory, for some territory is necessary for 
the free and independent exercise of the supreme mis- 
sion of the Pope. Hence the claims of the Holy See 
are animated by a quite different purpose, spirit and 
object. These claims, which, we repeat, Italy has al- 
ways avoided discussing directly with the Pope, should 
be studied with care, and any sordid sense which might 
be attributed to them should be eliminated. If this be> 
done, it will be evident that the conclusion some seek 
to draw from them, namely, that their granting would 
imply a loss to Italy in territory or political prestigCy, 
is absolutely false. 



The Claims of the Pope. 39 

Let us consider this statement. Since the day his 
territory was invaded and wrested from him the Pope 
has not ceased to cry out: "Give me back the means 
necessary for Papal independence and liberty." Now 
what is this means which the Pope demands'? Up to 
the time he was despoiled of his kingdom that Idng- 
dom was precisely the means suitable for the end in 
view; for, according to him (and he was a proper 
judge), it formed the title, fulcrum and extrinsic basis 
for the free and independent exercise of the mission 
of the Pontiff. When his kingdom was taken from him 
the Pope was not given anything equivalent in its 
stead, for the much-acclaimed Law of Guarantees, as 
has been shown, failed completely in its purpose. 
When, therefore, the Pope now demands the restora- 
tion of the means necessary for his independence, he 
demands certainly either the kingdom which was taken 
from him, prescinding from the question of its extent, 
or something else which would be practically equiva- 
lent, to determine which would naturally require seri- 
ous negotiations between the parties concerned. 

Those who deny the Pope any territorial dominion 
allege, in support of their position, the following 
threefold argument: first, in the early centuries of 
Christianity and even in our own day, the Papacy ex- 
isted and continues to exist without such dominion; 
secondly, if we admit the necessity of territorial do- 
minion for the exercise of the Papacy, we must admit 
the paradoxical conclusion that such sovereignty 
should have the same universal extent as the Papacy 
itself, namely, the entire world ; thirdly, territorial do- 
minion is incompatible with the Pope's spiritual mis- 
sion — it distracts from its full development and low- 



40 The Pope and Italy. 

ers the Pope in the eyes of the world, which will have 
greater reverence for him if he be not involved in the 
secular care of an earthly kingdom. 

If we examine this threefold objection we shall dis- 
cover that it is due to a confusion of ideas and is with- 
out foundation in fact. In the first place, the question 
under discussion is not whether the Papacy can or 
cannot exist without territorial dominion, but rather 
whether existing without that dominion it can exercise 
with full liberty and independence its mission. Now, 
who could maintain that without territorial dominion 
the life of the Papacy at present and during the first 
centuries is and was free and independent ? The Pope 
proclaims the contrary. Moreover, from the fact that 
he has not this dominion we cannot logically conclude 
that he has no right to it. Just as there have been 
many things which first existed only in fact and after- 
wards became invested with right, so, too, there have 
been many things like the territorial dominion of the 
Pope, for instance, which in the beginning were solely 
matters of right and afterward became matters of 
fact as well. Then only would this objection have any 
weight, if it were contended that territorial dominion 
is of such absolute and intrinsic necessity, that without 
it the Papacy could not exist in any way whatever. 
What we contend instead is that territorial dominion 
is of relative and extrinsic necessity for the practical 
exercise of the Papacy. It is not, therefore, logical to 
deny the necessity of territorial dominion, simply be- 
cause at a certain period of time, for one reason or 
another, the Pope did not possess it. 

It is likewise arbitrary and false to infer, in the sec- 
ond place, a universal extension of the territorial do- 



The Claims of the Pope. 41 

minion of the Pope from the "universality of the 
Papacy; for the authority and dominion of the Pope 
are exercised in different ways in his own See and in 
the rest of the world. Here we could apply that sub- 
lime verse of Dante, who, in speaking of the govern- 
ment of God in heaven and over the universe, exclaims : 
Che in tutte parti impera, e quivi regge (That in all 
parts He commands, hut here He reigns). — (Div. 
Comm. Inf. I, 127.) 

The Pontiff demands territorial sovereignty, not be- 
cause it is required where the effects of his acts may 
reach, but where the acts themselves are produced. 
The Pope has no need of territorial dominion in any 
country of the world that its inhabitants may hear and 
follow his word ; but he has the need of it for himself 
in the making and transmission of his acts of govern- 
ment and policy, and for those who assist him in his 
august See. The need of territorial dominion in the 
center of papal activity is one thing; quite another 
thing is the need of this dominion in the entire world, 
since everywhere without such dominion men can hear 
and foUoAv the words of the Pope. Thus this second 
objection, too, is without value. 

In the third place, the contention already mentioned 
(even if we refrain from an appeal to history, which 
would refute and manifest its nullity) could have 
weight only in the supposition that the Pope had no 
need of this dominion and could direct the human race 
through invisible ways without the assistance of mate- 
rial means. Since, however, the conditions of his min- 
istry are such that he must govern men with human and 
even material means ; since, too, he has his See and his 
center of action in the midst of a world of men, sur- 



42 The Pope and Italy. 

rounded on all sides by the Powers of the earth, who 
treat with him for the benefit of their own subjects; 
since, finally, his direction of the Church, as we saw in 
Chapter VI, must be immune from any interference, 
whether national or international, he, therefore, re- 
quires, as has already been shown, independent terri- 
tory, which, far from being repugnant to the Papacy 
and a source of embarrassment to it, is a useful and 
necessary means for the attainment of its essential 
ends. Not to recognize or not to admit this necessity 
and utility would imply either that the Pope should 
not exercise his office independently, or that he should 
not exercise it for men and with human means, or that 
civil power would not contribute to the better discharge 
of his office, or that becoming Pope he should cease to 
be man or to act as man and should live in the Land of 
the Moon. 

Let us then avoid all confusion and face the issue 
squarely. Granted that the Pope is an ultra-national 
sovereign, recognized as such, through historical facts 
admitted by all the Powers, Italy included; granted, 
too, that the -Pope as such has an innate and inalien- 
able right to be absolutely free from any human au- 
thority in the exercise of his world mission, as like- 
wise, compelled by the facts of history, all the Powers, 
not excluding Italy,* so recognize and admit ; granted. 



* October 9, 1870, namely, before transferring the seat of his govern- 
ment to Eome, Victor Immanuel II, replying in Florence to a delegation 
Tvhich brought him from Eome the result of the election held there on 
June 2d, received it with this solemn declaration: "As King and as 
Oatholic, in proclaiming the unity of Italy, I remain firm in my determi- 
nation to guarantee the liberty of the Church and the independence of 
the Sovereign Pontiff." 



The Claims of the Pope. 43 

too, that the kingdom of which the Pope was the legiti- 
mate possessor constituted according to his own state- 
ment and would constitute today the extrinsic reason 
and means of such independence and freedom ; granted, 
finally, that this kingdom has been forcibly taken from 
the Pope and has never been restored to him, nor any- 
thing else equivalent given in its stead; granted all 
this, does it not follow that the Pope has not only the 
right but a sacrosanct duty as well to protest and de- 
mand, until such time as other provisions have been 
made, the restitution of that which was taken from 
him? 

And Avho shall dare blame the Pope, if. Priest as he 
is, he does not hesitate to discharge this important 
duty which binds him in every moment of his life ? For 
the attitude of the Pope — ^be it noted — in claiming 
from the Italian Government for the Holy See its in- 
alienable rights, is, not an option based on caprice or 
his own personal will, but the fulfilment of a serious, 
inherent obligation — an obligation he could not refuse 
to discharge without being false to his most important 
duties to Christendom that centers itself in him. This 
explains why the four Popes, Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius 
X, and Benedict XV, in language substantially the 
same though differing somewhat in minor details, have 
always demanded as means for their freedom and in- 
dependence, the restoration either of that civil domin- 
ion of which they had been despoiled or something else 
which as regards their liberty and independence might 
act as an adequate substitute. 

Nor should we be surprised at such insistence. Sur- 
prise would be justified if the contrary were true ; that 
is, in the case of a passive acquiescence on the part of 



44 The Pope and Italy. 

the Pope in the abnormal status quo. Nor are there 
any grounds for the insinuation that the Pope seeks 
civil power not because of any urgent need of it, but 
out of an instinct of human ambition. Besides the his- 
torical falsity of such an insinuation, and besides all 
that has been hitherto pointed out, it is not at all prob- 
able nor admissible that he who commands over the 
entire world and who sees at his feet the rulers of the 
world, should aspire through vulgar ambition to the 
wearisome and embarrassing government of a small 
population. 

Moreover, as against the unquestionable right and 
duty of the Pope to demand what may be necessary for 
the free exercise of his mission in the sense explained, 
what weight can that exaggerated pretense of reluc- 
tance to reach a desirable solution have which has been 
advanced by some for the purpose of impeding any 
negotiations on the subject? Does the right of a cred- 
itor grow less because of a reluctance, real or feigned, 
on the part of the debtor to fulfill his obligation 1 
Again, the specter of Italian dismemberment and ruin 
exists only ,in the imagination of the Pope's oppo- 
nents. Then only would his opponents be justified in 
conjuring up this specter, if, in mutual negotiation on 
the subject, the Pope had insisted, as an essential con- 
dition, upon such dismemberment and the consequent 
ruin of Italy, and, further, if it had been found impos- 
sible to discover any adequate equivalent means either 
to protect the exercise of the Pope's prerogatives or 
to escape the evils his adversaries pretend to fear. 
But until the Pope has been consulted on the subject, 
until negotiations have been opened, it is preposterous 
and unfair to alarm the nation by presenting as the 



The Sovereignty of the Pope. 45 

goal of the Pope's aims a desire to deprive Italy of 
territory and political power, merely because he in- 
sists upon his right to a place adequate in size for his 
world-wide office which would in no way depend upon 
sjij particular Power. We shall now proceed to clear 
away a false impression which may exist on this point. 



CHAPTER XI. 

THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE POPE AND THE UNITY AND 
INTEGRITY OF ITALY, 

GRANTED that the Pope were to occupy as a Sov- 
ereign, by reason of his high office, a determined 
portion of Italian soil, would any detriment to national 
unity and the territorial integrity of Italy result? In 
other words, is the territorial sovereignty of the Pope 
compatible with the national unity and territorial in- 
tegrity of Italy? The answer must be manifestly in 
the affirmative if we consider the nature of the sov- 
ereignty which is peculiar to the Pope and different 
from any other kind. Its nature, as is obvious, must be 
deduced from the end which the territorial sovereignty 
of the Pope is to secure. Now this end, as has been 
stated, is none other than the full and absolute inde- 
pendence of the Papacy in the exercise of its mission. 
Hence there does not enter into the concept of terri- 
torial sovereignty as applied to the Pope all that which 
enters into the concept of national sovereignty in gen- 
eral. It includes only whatever is implied in the abso- 
lutely free and independent exercise of the Papacy. 
Hence the territorial sovereignty of the Pope would 
exclude any idea of hostility, rivalry, domination, con- 



46 The Pope and Italy. 

quest or expansion. Such ideas at most could have 
had place only when the civil power of the Pon- 
tiffs existed by reason of both titles mentioned in 
Chapter VIII; that is, when the Popes possessed a 
territorial kingdom not only because of the needs of 
the Papacy but likewise by force of political events 
and the will of the people, whose individual and na- 
tional interests they were in duty bound to safeguard 
and develop through the use of the means recognized 
by international law ; when, in a word, their territorial 
kingdom besides being papal took upon itself the char- 
acter and had the same nature as other human king- 
doms. Today, however, the necessity of territorial 
sovereignty for the Pope is on a totally different basis. 
The Pope, certainly, has no royal ambition of ruling 
subjects, no covetous aspiration for a vast earthly 
kingdom, no cruel intention to injure anyone — least of 
all, his beloved Italy. He desires special Papal 
territory, only in order that he may exercise his ultra- 
national office with that complete and absolute inde- 
pendence which is necessary and which was recognized 
by all the Powers and even by Italy, through those who 
were her spokesmen both before and after the unifica- 
tion. 

Nor would the nature or dimensions of the Pope's 
territorial sovereignty today jeopardize at all the 
unity and integrity of the nation and people. On the 
contrary, this sovereignty, even though independent, 
by furnishing a moral basis to the unity and integrity 
of the nation would give them greater strength.* 



*A query appeared in the public press whether the territory occupied 
by the Pope should not be considered Papal and no longer Italian. To 
this subtle question (which in English might be styled a form of 



The Sovereignty of the Pope. 47 

There is therefore no question of dismembering 
Italy, but merely of uniting and strengthening it all the 
more. There is no question of injuring that privileged 
nation, but of removing from it that seed of dissension 
and strife which renders her weak and dishonored at 
home and abroad. There is no question of detaching a 
portion of territory to give it to an enemy nation which 
might eventually use it against Italy herself, but 
merely of recognizing in the Pope — the friend and the 
benefactor — ^his previous right to occupy because of his 
office an almost negligible portion of territory for the 
good of Italy and all humanity. It is a question of 
fulfilling a moral, civil, and political duty and of at- 
tracting to Italy the good wishes and the sympathy of 
three hundred millions of Catholics, and of having the 
I)lessing, protection and support of the most powerful 
personage and sovereign in the entire world. These 
unquestionable benefits which would follow from a sat- 
isfactory settlement of the abnormal position of the 
Pope should suffice of themselves to frustrate the evil 
attempts which have been made to frighten minds with 
the specter of an imaginary territorial and political in- 
jury to the Italian Government. 

In this connection it is worth while to recall the 
famous letter, already alluded to, written June 15, 
1887, by Leo XIII to the Cardinal Secretary of State, 



tanglefoot) we might reply with equal subtlety that the problem in 
question permits four possibilities: 1. An Italian territory which would 
not be Papal. 2. A Papal territory which would not be Italian. 3. An 
Italian territory which would be at the same time Papal. 4. A Papal 
territory which would be Italian as well. The first certainly would not 
be acceptable to the Pope. The second would not perhaps be admitted 
by the Italian State. The third and fourth, in view of the explanations 
•contained in this pamphlet, might perhaps be admitted by both parties. 



48 The Pope and Italy. 

Mariano Eampolla. In a passage of this letter the 
great Pope faces sqnarely the exaggerated territorial 
objection and the consequent lack of unity in the- 
Italian State which it was so much feared would follow 
from it. 

He discusses it, prescinding from the possibility that 
as a result of negotiation a different remedy or means 
might be found which would obviate any dismember- 
ment in the sense feared. He discusses it, too, without 
entering into the merit of the objection. Speaking 
from the point of view of Papal rights, he takes the 
position of their opponents as if accepting the objec- 
tion and develops the following argument ad hominem: 
''Should the recognition of Papal rights necessarily 
involve the loss of State unity,* let us, without con- 
sidering the intrinsic merits of the case, put ourselves, 
for the moment in the place of our opponents. Let us 
ask if that condition of unity constitutes for nations a 
good so absolute that without it they can have neither 
prosperity nor greatness — is it so supreme that it. 
must prevail over every other consideration? We may 
point, in answer, to the existence of nations flourish- 
ing, powerful and glorious which have neither had nor 
have that species of unity which is here desired. We 
make appeal likewise in answer to natural reason 
which recognizes that in a state of conflict the good of 
justice must prevail, as the first foundation of the hap- 
piness and stability of States, particularly when it is 



* As is clear from the context, the unity of State, here mentioned, 
refers to that special form of unity in the relations of the Italian State 
to the Church, which had been championed by the Pope's opponents. 
Italy, however, would still be in reality united, even though the fornf 
of that unity were to undergo some accidental changes. 



The Sovereignty of the Pope. 49 

linked, as happens here, with the highest interest of 
religion and of the entire Church. There should be no 
reason for hesitation. For if Italy has been specially 
favored by Providence in that the great Institution of 
the Papacy has been placed within her confines — an 
honor of which any nation might well feel proud — it is 
right and proper that Italians should not consider diffi- 
culties in maintaining it in a condition which becomes 
it. All the more since without excluding in fact other 
useful and opportune means, without speaking of 
other precious advantages, an Italy living in peace 
with the Papacy would see strongly cemented the ties 
of religious unity, which is the foundation of every 
other unity and the source of immense advantages 
even in the social order." 

It is clear from this that the trumped-up difficulty 
inferred from the anticipated detachment of a portion 
of Italy for the small dominion of the Pontiff disap- 
pears completely whether we consider the principle of 
unquestionable justice involved, which for the welfare 
of the community must prevail over anything else ; or 
because of the opportune measures for the advantage 
of the State itself which could result from cordial 
negotiations ; or finally because of the exceptional na- 
ture of Papal dominion which, as has been shown, is 
not in opposition either to the integrity or unity of the 
nation. 

To understand how unfounded are the fears ex- 
pressed, we have but to observe the attitude which the 
Pope has always maintained toward that nation at 
whose center he has his See. He who cherishes a warm 
affection for that nation, despite the great injury done 
to him by the Italian Government, never has assumed 



50 The Pope and Italy. 

a hostile and aggressive attitude towards her; never 
has he instigated his subjects throughout the world to 
hatred and opposition toward her. Not only has he not 
had recourse to his formidable moral and political 
power to attack those who have robbed him of his 
throne, not only has he never taken any diplomatic ac- 
tion to induce the Powers to intervene with force of 
arms to restore his kingdom, but on the contrary, 
while deploring the great wrong done him and protest- 
ing in the name of his violated rights, he has, as it were, 
possessed his soul in patience in the expectation that 
the force of right and the logic of events would eventu- 
ally induce Italy herself to peaceably seek the desired 
reconciliation. We may be sure from this that he 
would not accept even an inch of Italian territory were 
it to be secured for him by force of foreign arms, 
without the free consent of the Italian Government. 

Hence, if the Roman Question were ever to be made 
a pretext for foreign military intervention, such inter- 
vention could never by any possibility be attributed to 
the work of Papal diplomacy, but would be ascribable 
exclusively to" ulterior motives on the part of the for- 
eign nation responsible for the intervention, which had 
made of the Roman Question a plausible pretext. Nor 
has the Pope finally, in keeping with the fundamental 
teachings of the Church, ever encouraged the faithful 
to rebel in any way against constituted civil authority. 
On the contrary, he has always urged them to obey 
faithfully and to serve their countries with upright 
lives. 

A\nien the war, which neither the Pope nor Catholics 
in general had either willed or provoked, came to 
scatter devastation among the nations and ruin and 



The Sovereignty of the Pope. 51 

sorrow among the peoples, and he saw the hearts of 
his children filled with the bitterness of anger and 
hatred, he spoke no word which even remotely might 
have injured Italy, however much her enemies would 
have rejoiced and applauded him had he done so. His 
admirable conduct and the inspiration of his example 
were an incentive to the faithful in Italy to fulfill their 
obligations with scrupulous loyalty. Hence the Italian 
Catholics, and particularly the clergy, in the recent war 
were not inferior to the Catholics of other countries in 
the defense of their fatherland.* 

Still another fact may be mentioned — a fact that at 
once indicates the Papal dilemma and evinces the strict 
necessity of Papal neutrality. On the one hand, the 
hostile attitude of Italy toward the Papacy effectually 
prevented the Pope's aiding her in her relations with 
the nations involved in the war. On the other hand, 
however much any act to the detriment of Italy Avould 
have rejoiced her enemies, the Pope abstained from 
such injury. This non-interference of the Papacy was 
actuated by the twofold motive of justice and mercy : 
first, the inflexible principle of Papal neutrality; sec- 



* The neutrality of the Pope towards warring nations, prescinding 
from his own personal and natural sentiments of patriotism, derives its 
origin from the exalted character of the Papacy, as such, which he ex- 
clusively possesses and administers impartially. It would, however, be 
altogether illogical to attempt to infer from this papal neutrality an 
obligation on the part of Catholics to observe neutrality during the 
time of war, or to assign the neutrality of Catholics to the neutrality 
of the Pope as its cause. Were we to argue this way we would err 
grievously in identifying, as it were, the duty of the Pope with the duty 
of the Pope's subjects, and in confounding the august prerogatives of 
the Pope with the national duties of his subjects. All citizens, whether 
Catholic or not, are bound through duty and love of country to defend 
their native land against its enemies. 



52 The Pope and Italy. 

ond, the Pope's sincere love for Italy, whose sufferings 
caused him a deep sorrow he was often unable to con- 
ceal. 

He has often in the manner of a true father invited 
Italy to make peace with him, holding out to her at- 
tractive promises in the discharge of a duty to God and 
to men. ''Having urged a reconciliation with the 
Papacy and having indicated the fundamental condi- 
tions of that reconciliation, we feel that we have per- 
formed our duty before God and men, whatever may 
be the consequences that shall follow" (Ibid). So, too, 
in the following passage is the voice of the father 
heard: "May it please heaven that the ardent desire 
for peace which we have for every nation may in the 
manner in which we most wish be found useful to Italy, 
the nation to which God has joined so intimately the 
Boman Pontificate, and which the ties of nature make 
dear to our heart. "We on our part, as we have often 
stated, have certainly long desired for the Italians 
great security and tranquility and the final removal of 
the unfortunate dissension with the Eoman Pontificate. 
In the removal of the dissension, however, justice must 
be observed and the dignity of the Apostolic See must 
be respected, both of which have been violated less by 
any violent act of the people than by a conspiracy of 
secret societies. We wish to state that the only way to 
a peaceful settlement is the recognition of the condition 
that the Pope must not be subject to the power of any 
one, but must enjoy full and real liberty, as every con- 
sideration of justice demands. The interests of Italy 
would not only not suffer any injury from a settlement 
on this basis but would on the contrary derive there- 
from much advantage and happiness." (Leo XIII.) 



The Conduct of Italy. 53 



CHAPTER XII. 

THE CONDUCT OF ITALY. 

THE present relations between the Holy See and the 
Government are opposed to all justice and are very 
harmful to both sides. A satisfactory settlement could 
be made in such a way that neither would suffer any 
injury, but on the contrary both would reap desirable 
advantages in the moral, civil and political orders. The 
Tjetter class of persons in Italy and elsewhere ardently 
■desire a settlement. The members of reactionary 
parties and those who are influenced by them are the 
only ones who might oppose it. The Supreme Pontiff 
has often in all kindness invited Italy to make peace 
and effect a reconciliation, assuring her that the rea- 
sonable claims of the Holy See would be kept within 
the limits of justice. Under these circumstances, then, 
i^e may properly ask why it is that the Italian Govern- 
ment remains inactive and makes no effort to satisfy 
these reasonable desires for the cessation of that 
lamentable state of dissension which disturbs and poi- 
sons the life of the nation in all its elements and casts 
a stain on the good name of Italy before the world. 

Why is it, too, that Catholics, and particularly 
Italian Catholics — ^not those who unfortunately do not 
understand the Roman Question, but those who under- 
stand it well, and realize its importance for the life of 
the Church and the best interests of the nation — why is 
it that out of human respect they remain silent or if 
they speak at all they do so timidly and minimize the 
facts? Have the boldness and power of the secret 



54 The Pope and Italy. 

societies reached so far as this that the intelligent 
statesmen of Italy remain inactive and refrain from 
discussing this most important problem? Why is it 
that these do not induce the Government to take the 
matter up officially with the Holy See, that, once for 
all, the question settled, the nation may be in a position 
to enjoy freely the fruits of peace with the Pope? The- 
time is ripe for the settlement of the dissension, and 
Italy should be able to find within herself courage and 
power to put an end to that evident disorder which, 
because of the dissension with the Pope, has stained, 
the life of Italy at home and abroad. 



CHAPTEE XIII. 

FUNDAMENTAL POINTS FOR THE NEGOTIATION AND 
SETTLEMENT. 

npHIS is not the place to examine the various practi- 
■^ cal proposals which might be the subject of discus- 
sion in the final negotiations. Nor is this the place to 
analyze in detail the opinions either of those who 
argue for a settlement without territory, or of those 
who would demand an agreement with territory sim- 
pliciter, that is, in the absolute sense in which the 
Pope was a Civil Ruler by a two-fold title as explained 
in Chapter VIII, or of those who would have it with 
territory secundum quid, as explained in Chapter XI. 
In addition to what has been said in Chapter VIXI, 
however, we must observe that those who desire a 
solution of the Roman Question without territory, 
seem to forget that the Papacy according to the com- 



Points for the Negotiation and Settlement. 55 

mon consent of men is of such transcendent nature 
that it can operate neither as a guest nor as a tenant 
nor wherever it is subject to the interference or control 
of any power whatsoever. They seem to forget, too, 
that once we exclude the right of the Pope to territory, 
there would arise the necessity that the Holy See be 
guarded constantly and protected in its ministry by 
foreign Powers whose Catholic subjects have little en- 
thusiasm for Italy. Now, the voluntary assignment 
of territory to the Pope by Italy would be less diffi- 
cult and more satisfactory than any form of foreign 
intervention, more satisfactory even than the so-called 
internationalization of the Law of Guarantees, which 
in such a case could only be considered if the Law of 
Guarantees, discussed in Chapter IX, assumed a form 
substantially different. But even in that event the 
necessity of a permanent and inviolable territory for 
the complex and far-reaching duties of the Papacy 
would still remain. 

The common good would require as fundamental 
that the settlement between the Pope and the State 
should assume the nature, not so much of a concilia- 
tion, as of a reconciliation. That is to say, it should 
imply a substantial return, if only in part to the status 
quo ante not so much as regards the exercise of civil 
power based upon that title in force of which like any 
other earthly ruler the Pope had legitimately exer- 
cised it, but rather as regards the civil power based 
upon that other inalienable title inherent in the exer- 
cise of the Papacy to which we referred in Chapter 
VIII. In a word, we could have between the Pope and 
the State a species of compromise which would imply 
a settlement upon the basis of mutual concessions. It 



56 The Pope cmd Italy. - 

should not be difficult for the Italian Government to 
open negotiations. If it lived up to its former sol- 
emn declarations nothing more would be necessary. 

First, it should recognize the Pope as an ultra- 
national sovereign with the right, not because of any 
concession of the Italian Government, but because of 
the natural demands of the Papacy, to be absolutely in- 
dependent of every earthly ruler. 

Secondly, the Government should recognize in the 
Pope a second right corresponding to his supreme 
prerogatives; a right, namely, to have at his disposi- 
tion, independently of any earthly authority, all the 
means requisite for the free and practical use of his 
sovereign ministry. This right, too, should be recog- 
nized as an innate one, and not as a generous conces- 
sion as the unfortunate form of the Law of Guarantees 
would have it. 

Thirdly, the Italian Government would have to 
recognize and acknowledge the independence of the 
person of the Pope and of his official acts, the inde- 
pendence of his place of residence and of the offices 
of his government, finally the independence of a por- 
tion of territory in keeping with the dignity not so 
much of a deposed civil ruler as of a reigning sover- 
eign who is in fact the greatest of all sovereigns. 
Again, this independence must not be considered in 
the nature of a gift, which would nullify its independ- 
ent character, but in the nature of a right. 

These three points in their general outlines could not 
be very well modified by the Pope, nor should they en- 
counter any great opposition on the part of the State. 
They could therefore be accepted as the fundamental 
basis of the negotiations. 



Points for the Negotiation and Settlement. 57 

The first two, though matters of right and fact, being 
abstract and theoretic in character, cannot very well 
be questioned. All the Powers through their diplo- 
matic relations with the Holy See and in other ways 
have acknowledged and respected them. Italy herself 
as we have seen has proclaimed them. A difficulty 
might arise perhaps in adjusting the practical details 
of the third point, particularly in determining the na- 
ture and extent of the Pope's independence in his per- 
son and acts of government as well as the extent 
of his independence in his place of residence, in the 
offices of his government and his dominion in the ter- 
ritory belonging to him. No exception, however, could 
be admitted as regards the independence of the person 
and acts of government as they come from the Pope. 
Nor can this independence be properly the subject of 
discussion mthout calling into question the supremacy 
and spiritual authority of the Pope. However, the in- 
dependence of the Pope in his acts in so far as these, in 
their practical application in Italy, might conflict with 
the disposition of the local civil authorities could be 
regulated by mutual consent, that the efficient execu- 
tion of these acts might not be subject to delay or other 
obstacles and difficulties. 

The State might readily acknowledge and favor the 
independence of the Pope as to his residence and the 
offices of his government, since in the Law of Guaran- 
tees, though not in a way altogether satisfactory, she 
has attempted to make provision for it. This inde- 
pendence, however, could not continue in its present 
form, but must be recognized as a full and inviolable 
right implied in the nature of the Papacy, and not de- 
pendent upon the favor of the Italian State. 



58 The Pope and Italy, 

As regards the independent dominion of the Pope 
due him because of the needs of his office in exchange 
for the territory that was taken from him, we should 
remember that it is to serve him for the absolute free 
and independent exercise of his office. Hence it must 
be of such a nature that the Pope need not go outside 
of it for his necessaries of life, the means of communi- 
cation with the various nations, as well as to provide 
for the needs of those who for any reason even politi- 
cal in nature may be attached to his See. While we 
may hope and believe that the Pope out of paternal 
affection will be disposed to make every possible con- 
cession within justice, the Italian State on its side 
must be disposed to take up the question in all calm- 
ness for the well-being and honor of the nation, with 
the determination to be guided, not by the passions of 
strong emotion, but by the principles of justice. Hith- 
erto the discussion of the Roman Question on the part 
of the State has not been marked by the proper calm- 
ness, but rather, as is well known, by the heat of pas- 
sion and extravagant phrases inspired by the poison- 
ous spirit of sectarianism. Let us place upon the 
scales the forcible arguments of law and of fact; let 
us place thereon the advantages and disadvantages 
which the various solutions would bring to both sides ; 
and then let us have the honest courage to accept the 
consequences imposed by truth and justice without al- 
lowing ourselves to be swayed by the threats of those 
who, though they call themselves friends of Italy, yet 
plot against her life at their secret gatherings and 
attempt by their guiles to hamper the solution of 
the most vital and important problems of the nation. 

Whatever settlement, therefore, may be arranged 



Points for the Negotiation and Settlement. 59 

with the Pope, we may rest assured it shall not redound 
to the detriment of Italy. We may be sure, too, that 
whatever form the settlement between the Italian Gov- 
ernment and the Pope may take on the question of the 
latter 's territorial dominion, whether it be that the 
Pope is to govern as a Civil Prince absolutely and un- 
conditionally a small portion of Italy, or whether some 
other solution is reached, neither the formal unity of 
Italy nor her formal integrity of territory will suffer 
thereby. In any event, despite all the unfounded and 
unjust fears and predictions of evil on the subject, it 
will turn out to be for the best interests of the nation. 
For if Italy could not be said to be united nor to have 
territorial integrity as long as one of her villages be- 
longed to a foreign power, on the other hand she could 
be called and would be one and entire in territory if 
the Pope were to possess a small portion of her soil, for 
it would be the Pope and not a foreign Power.* 

If under these circumstances no injury would follow 
from a settlement of the question either to national 



* The Eoman Question, which has called forth many more or less 
noteworthy attempts at solution, apart from the mere territorial fea- 
ture involved, implies the question of the city of Rome itself, where, to 
quote Dante: U' siede il successor del maggior Piero (Inferno, II, 24). 

At Rome, since 1871, side by side with the Pope, who as a matter of 
fact and of right for so many centuries has had his residence therein, 
wielding from that city his Papal authority for the benefit of the entire 
world of mankind, there resides too the King of Italy, who, attracted 
by the historic and political grandeur of Rome, transferred thither his 
residence from Florence. Under these circumstances, in the settlement 
of the Roman Question, what would become of Rome? 

Our reference to this concrete point of the Roman Question makes no 
pretence at indicating how the problem is to be ultimately solved, since 
a definite solution can result only from an amicable discussion between 
the parties concerned. 

We merely wish to recall to mind several solutions which have been 



60 The Pope and Italy. 

unity or to the formal integrity of Italian territory, 
but, on the contrary, great advantages would accrue to 
the nation, what other objection, we may ask, delays 
the State from turning to the Pope to discover the con- 
ditions which he might lay down in the final settlement 
of this deplorable state of dissension? The Head of 
Christianity with his supreme authority might perhaps 
lay down conditions more mild and paternal than those 
at which we, after an objective study of the Roman 
Question in all its details, have logically arrived. 
From our impartial discussion of the subject the fol- 
lowing conclusions may now be drawn : 

First, the Popes, in demanding the restoration of 
their kingdom, exercised a right and a duty. 

Secondly, in demanding this restoration not in its 
material integrity but in the measure that it was 
strictly necessary for their office, they were temperate 
and generous. 



advanced. Among other suggestions it has been proposed that the Pope 
should retain as his territory a strip of land running along the Tiber to 
the sea, which wouid thus mark the division between Borne and Vatican 
Eome. An almost similar project was proposed by the Italian Govern- 
ment in 1870, at that time residing at Florence. Such a suggestion was 
mentioned by General R. Cadorna on September 20, 1870, in his acts of 
capitulation upon his entrance into the Papal city. In virtue of this 
proposal the Pontiff would have sovereign dominion over Castel San 
Angela and the Leonine City. .At that time, however, the Pope, because 
of the revolution then menacing him, and the actual invasion of the city, 
not being possessed of means with which to preserve the public peace, 
neither could nor would entertain this proposal. 

Another proposal would have the King of Italy (after the example 
of the United States, the capital of which as well as the capital of each 
State is far from the sea and in a location removed from great noise) 
transfer his seat of government to a more suitable place. Rome, as ex- 
plained in Chapter XI, in neither of these events would cease to be 
Italian, 



Points for the Negotiation and Settlement. 61 

Thirdl}^, when they invited in so many Avays the 
Italian Government to effect a settlement, promising 
on their part to make every opportune concession and 
showing themselves willing to accept a suitable substi- 
tute which would efficaciously guarantee their liberty 
and absolute independence, they were truly paternal. 

If the State had corresponded or would now corre- 
spond with this noble attitude, Italy would enjoy in 
consequence great advantages. As long as Italy re- 
fuses to satisfy the longings of honest people through- 
out the world, and continues to prolong the present 
wrong and abnormal condition of the Holy See and 
the nation, future generations will hold her accountable 
for the wrong done and to her they will impute the 
evils which may or can follow. 

The Roman Question, therefore, should be decided 
in order to complete an act of sacrosanct justice to 
Italy's greatest benefactor. It should be so decided 
that peace may be brought to souls and the legitimate 
longings of all Christians satisfied. It should be de- 
cided for the glory of Italy so privileged by God, that 
the dishonor, which has attached to her good name so 
long, may be removed. 

May a salutary discussion of the question soon de- 
velop among all good men who really love Italy and 
particularly among the members of Catholic societies, 
who should incorporate, as an essential part of their 
program, the reconciliation of the nation with the Pope. 
Although in the Pope resides the exclusive right to de- 
termine the manner and conditions of reconciliation 
and to state what form will be most consistent with t^io 
immortal interests of the Church, nevertheless it is the 
duty of every subject of his to do all he can to bring 



62 The Pope and Italy. 

about this reconciliation which implies the triumph of 
justice. Unfortunately, the opponents of a reconcilia- 
tion, fearful at the thought that it may be accomplished, 
are working hard in secret and with daring impudence 
constantly endeavor in bitter articles of the press to 
distort the Roman Question, even going so far as to 
charge Catholics with the fact of its existence. In 
this way they succeed in deceiving many, causing them 
to believe that a solution of the problem would be of 
interest only to the Pope, concealing from them the 
fact that the moral and political life of Italy, both 
within and without the nation, has been affected by the 
consequences of the unfortunate dissension. 

May God grant that able men may take up this seri- 
ous problem and press it to solution ! What great joy 
would not fill the earth the day in which it could be 
announced that Italy had become reconciled with the 
Pope, and that the Pope had extended over her his 
hand in benediction ! That day would surely mark the 
beginning of a new era for Italy, rich in its promises 
of honor and glory. 






